love football, but not a blackbelt, what other teams in recent history have ran the 4-3 under? I have done my research on what type of players it takes to run it but i wanna know the other teams that have had sucess running it.

The Arizona Cardinals are the most recent team to run a lot of it at the pro level. i will let you figure out the "success" that they have had in doing so. Seattle is also listed as running it as its base defense.

there are a couple of links floating around about pro adaptation of the defense that I will link

The Cardinals play a 4-3 "under" defense with threads of the 3-4 because right ends Travis LaBoy and Bertrand Berry often operate from a two-point stance rather than a three-point. LaBoy, who suffered a left biceps injury against Philadelphia, should play with his arm in a brace. LaBoy hasn't been worth the five-year, $22 million deal ($5.75 million signing bonus) that he signed March 3 to leave Tennessee. He's mostly a speed rusher and has some explosiveness, but gets bounced around against the run. Berry, 33, still provides some pressure based on his technique and excellent hand usage. But he gets worn down and can't play full time. He lacks power. LE Antonio Smith isn't fast enough to play end and isn't big enough to play inside. He does have very long arms, gives tremendous effort and at least keeps his feet moving as a rusher. At 300, former Bear Bryan Robinson is one of the smallest nose tackles in the game. He's also 34. However, Robinson still has some athletic ability, is a decent technician and plays with adequate strength at the point. His backup, chubby Gabe Watson, basically just flails around. Arizona's best D-lineman is Darnell Dockett, the three-technique DT. He has exceptional quickness for a big man. When he gets to the edge of blockers, he's hard to contain. He probably ranks among the top 10 in the NFL at his position. His backup, rookie Calais Campbell, has imposing size and is a fine athlete, but he also tends to play high and can't be counted on to stuff the run.

Strengths: Bright and instinctive, Dansby is also one of the league's best linebackers in pass coverage. The Cardinals' "4-3 under" base defense has been specifically designed for Dansby to use his excellent speed to make plays both against the pass and the run. Equally important, if not more so, however, is Dansby's development into a genuine team leader after previously having a reputation as a player who only showed up on Sundays during the Dennis Green regime. Borrowing a page from veteran Cardinals SS Adrian Wilson, Dansby set a high standard with his consistent work ethic in both practices and games and became a respected team leader of the highest order.

Defensive scheme: Seattle runs a base 4-3 under coordinator John Marshall, with multiple blitz packages designed to harass quarterbacks from every conceivable angle. There's an emphasis on zone coverage and speed over size, especially in the front seven. Previously a read-and-react defense, the Seahawks have become very aggressive and now fly to the ball. (Marshall is beginning to use more man-to-man coverages in hopes of creating big plays.) The active linebacker unit is the key to their success, and LB Julian Peterson is a versatile weapon whose explosiveness sets the tone. But Seattle must improve the run defense, which could be difficult given the lack of size up front.

From looking at the articles and things i have seen on this board may want to analyze teams that run a so-called hybrid 4-3/3/4 because the defense looks like a 3-4 especially if the off-side pass rusher uses a 2 point stance.

That said, after looking at these articles, our off season defensive acquisitions make a ton of sense now. Smith will play the same role here as he did in Zona, strong side DE who at times plays DT pass rusher. The DT acquisition Shaun Cody played in this defense at USC and of course Cushing is duplicating his role at USC.

The biggest hole that I see is that the Cardinals have had a top flight safety in Adrain Wilson and USC seems to always have a quality safety. the safeties in this defense seem to have to be able to switch from the box to deep coverage on the flly. Not sure the Wilson, Fergusion, etc. qualify.

Also, don't overlook the WLB battle, as it seems like this is a key position. Of the teams which are highlighted in the previous post, both Seattle (Peterson, now with Detroit) and Dansby are good sized LBers who are above average in coverage and as pass rushers. The closest physically/skill wise to these guys is Adibi. At times the WLB looks like an ILB in a 3-4 and needs to be a diverse play maker.

Overall, if nothing else, it appears as though both the players and fans now have an idea of what the defense is trying to do. Whether the Texans accomplish anything is another question, but at least there are 4-3 under blueprints to follow.

Edit note: Over the last handful of years neither Seattle nor Arizona has seemingly had the classic huge guy run stuffer in the middle. Also, the Seahawks have drafted a couple of USC defensive players , Lofa Tatupu, who physically is similiar to Ryans and Lawrence Jackson, who is physically similar to Antonio Smith...i.e a DE who is a little big/slow for De, but not really big enough for regular DT duties.

Neither defense has been dominate, but when effective they have agressive high sack, high turnover defenses that could run on because the DL have generaly been under sized. Seattle's version has been more successful over all, but Arizona did have a decent stretch at the end of last season, although that was not good enough to save the DC's job.

The biggest hole that I see is that the Cardinals have had a top flight safety in Adrain Wilson and USC seems to always have a quality safety. the safeties in this defense seem to have to be able to switch from the box to deep coverage on the flly. Not sure the Wilson, Fergusion, etc. qualify.

There was a thread a while back that had Pete Carroll breaking down this defense and he pretty much said the same thing. The safety is responsible for alot of things in this defense.

From looking at the articles and things i have seen on this board may want to analyze teams that run a so-called hybrid 4-3/3/4 because the defense looks like a 3-4 especially if the off-side pass rusher uses a 2 point stance.

That said, after looking at these articles, our off season defensive acquisitions make a ton of sense now. Smith will play the same role here as he did in Zona, strong side DE who at times plays DT pass rusher. The DT acquisition Shaun Cody played in this defense at USC and of course Cushing is duplicating his role at USC.

The biggest hole that I see is that the Cardinals have had a top flight safety in Adrain Wilson and USC seems to always have a quality safety. the safeties in this defense seem to have to be able to switch from the box to deep coverage on the flly. Not sure the Wilson, Fergusion, etc. qualify.

Also, don't overlook the WLB battle, as it seems like this is a key position. Of the teams which are highlighted in the previous post, both Seattle (Peterson, now with Detroit) and Dansby are good sized LBers who are above average in coverage and as pass rushers. The closest physically/skill wise to these guys is Adibi. At times the WLB looks like an ILB in a 3-4 and needs to be a diverse play maker.

Overall, if nothing else, it appears as though both the players and fans now have an idea of what the defense is trying to do. Whether the Texans accomplish anything is another question, but at least there are 4-3 under blueprints to follow.

Edit note: Over the last handful of years neither Seattle nor Arizona has seemingly had the classic huge guy run stuffer in the middle. Also, the Seahawks have drafted a couple of USC defensive players , Lofa Tatupu, who physically is similiar to Ryans and Lawrence Jackson, who is physically similar to Antonio Smith...i.e a DE who is a little big/slow for De, but not really big enough for regular DT duties.

Brian Cushing has been used in the "Elephant" role at USC, which is similar to what we are building here I think.

as an aside, if you click the link you will see that Bear Bryant gives some credit to Bum Phillips defensive numbering system.

The funny thing is... when the Cards, the Seahawks, or the Trojans had the most success... you can find them in a 3-man front more often!

I do not understand all the ruckus about Pete's 4-3 Under.
The guy employed multiple fronts last year!

A couple of months ago, I found a website that lists each team and the front(s) they used, but I can't find it anymore. (I thought I had stored that link, dang it!)

At any rate, I took a quick look at the last time we played the Titans.
Everybody knows about their D, I assume.
I only had time for the first quarter.
They used multiple fronts like us.
Mostly MIAMI and OVER.

love football, but not a blackbelt, what other teams in recent history have ran the 4-3 under? I have done my research on what type of players it takes to run it but i wanna know the other teams that have had sucess running it.

blackbelts take over!!!

thanks D Frank

Thought thread was talking about the 40. McCain is the closest. Anyway.. back to you guys.

__________________
I want to be able to recognize the difference between a "want" and a "need" and then I want to be satisfied with getting a need

The funny thing is... when the Cards, the Seahawks, or the Trojans had the most success... you can find them in a 3-man front more often!

I do not understand all the ruckus about Pete's 4-3 Under.
The guy employed multiple fronts last year!

A couple of months ago, I found a website that lists each team and the front(s) they used, but I can't find it anymore. (I thought I had stored that link, dang it!)

At any rate, I took a quick look at the last time we played the Titans.
Everybody knows about their D, I assume.
I only had time for the first quarter.
They used multiple fronts like us.
Mostly MIAMI and OVER.

If i am reading some of the material correctly one the aspects of the 4-3 under is that it has elements of both the classic 4-3 and 3-4 creating the illusion that your defense is more multiple than it is. That said, most NFL teams are very multiple, but have a base defense that it is in more time than in any other individual set.

Honestly, any excitement I have about the 4-3 under is really just knowing that the Texans have some sort of defensive plan. that was my main issue with the Richard Smith defense, not one person on this board could tell me what they were trying to do as a defense. From the comments, i have read from players, they may not have known either. As bad as things got under Capers, I at least understood what they were supposed to be doing.

One the defensive fronts, one of the links I posted earlier list both offensive and defensive fronts at the beginning of 2008. Here is a 2009 list from a FF site.

If i am reading some of the material correctly one the aspects of the 4-3 under is that it has elements of both the classic 4-3 and 3-4 creating the illusion that your defense is more multiple than it is. That said, most NFL teams are very multiple, but have a base defense that it is in more time than in any other individual set.

Honestly, any excitement I have about the 4-3 under is really just knowing that the Texans have some sort of defensive plan. that was my main issue with the Richard Smith defense, not one person on this board could tell me what they were trying to do as a defense. From the comments, i have read from players, they may not have known either. As bad as things got under Capers, I at least understood what they were supposed to be doing.

One the defensive fronts, one of the links I posted earlier list both offensive and defensive fronts at the beginning of 2008. Here is a 2009 list from a FF site.

You are correct about the 4-3 Under having some elements of the 3-4.
In fact, when a team like USC or Arizona line up in a 3 man front, they can use either of the 2 OLBs in similar fashion as a DE.

The link that I saw had all the specifics about the fronts that each NFL teams employed.

As far as Dunta's comments on RS's defense, I always took it as him being frustrated, and we all know how vocal Dunta "used" to be.
What I observed since 06 between Kubiak and Smith was that, in the beginning, they tried to be really aggressive with the defense, but we still couldn't get enough pressure up front, while keep getting burned on the back side. So they scaled it down. Then they tried to find ways to get the D to be aggressive without too much risks. Still, we need better players, and that's the bottom line.

Every year, people would complain... when will they bring in some real safety... we need better DB... we need another pass rusher... we need some mean presence on the interior line... we need somebody to complement Demeco.

I don't see how you can expect any DC to perform miracles with all those questions lingering all that time.

I never said RS is a good DC, I'm only saying that he wasn't all that bad to be made out as a scapegoat, that is all !!!

You are correct about the 4-3 Under having some elements of the 3-4.
In fact, when a team like USC or Arizona line up in a 3 man front, they can use either of the 2 OLBs in similar fashion as a DE.

The link that I saw had all the specifics about the fronts that each NFL teams employed.

As far as Dunta's comments on RS's defense, I always took it as him being frustrated, and we all know how vocal Dunta "used" to be.
What I observed since 06 between Kubiak and Smith was that, in the beginning, they tried to be really aggressive with the defense, but we still couldn't get enough pressure up front, while keep getting burned on the back side. So they scaled it down. Then they tried to find ways to get the D to be aggressive without too much risks. Still, we need better players, and that's the bottom line.

Every year, people would complain... when will they bring in some real safety... we need better DB... we need another pass rusher... we need some mean presence on the interior line... we need somebody to complement Demeco.

I don't see how you can expect any DC to perform miracles with all those questions lingering all that time.

I never said RS is a good DC, I'm only saying that he wasn't all that bad to be made out as a scapegoat, that is all !!!

The texans have have more high draft picks and high free agent dollar players on defense than offense, yet the offense went from one of the worst in the league to an effective one. If the Texans don't have a good defense it is on the some combination of coaching and talent evaluation. The offense isn't loaded with high round picks, assuming health the Texans will start 3 1st round DLmen, 1st round LBer, a high dollar DE, a high 2nd round Lber and 1 first round CB. Very few teams have that sort of draft and free agent pedigree on defense.

The texans have have more high draft picks and high free agent dollar players on defense than offense, yet the offense went from one of the worst in the league to an effective one. If the Texans don't have a good defense it is on the some combination of coaching and talent evaluation. The offense isn't loaded with high round picks, assuming health the Texans will start 3 1st round DLmen, 1st round LBer, a high dollar DE, a high 2nd round Lber and 1 first round CB. Very few teams have that sort of draft and free agent pedigree on defense.

I don't know about that! May take some research there.
(Don't need to check out the Ravens, they had a boat load of high picks on D).

Teams that don't have as many high draft picks as us were established teams with good players on their roster already.
Some has better personnel on O, some on D.

The two sides of the ball are related.
In our case, the offense has to take their share of the blame.
Those turnovers would kill a lot of teams, not just ours.
You ask any coach!

Kubiak/Shanahan/Rick Smith all have to take their share of the blame too! (And the players themselves, of course!)

I don't know about that! May take some research there.
(Don't need to check out the Ravens, they had a boat load of high picks on D).

Teams that don't have as many high draft picks as us were established teams with good players on their roster already.
Some has better personnel on O, some on D.

The two sides of the ball are related.
In our case, the offense has to take their share of the blame.
Those turnovers would kill a lot of teams, not just ours.
You ask any coach!

Kubiak/Shanahan/Rick Smith all have to take their share of the blame too! (And the players themselves, of course!)

Conversely, one could argue of the defense gave the offense more short fields, they could score on fewer plays and lessening the chance for mistakes.

(BTW, I agree with you on the turnovers/red zone issues, just wanted to turn that phrase around).

Overall, my point is that part of the reason the offense finds guys all throughout the draft and free agency is that Kubiak has clear specific plan of what he wants out of each position. It did not seem as though the defense had the same sort of specific, clear understanding. I really don't care about the 4-3 under versus 3-4 versus Tampa 2, etc. as much as having a quality defense. The scheme stuff is just watercooler...well message board chatter that i enjoy more than really care about.